Thanks Manan, for the KIP. These new metrics are very helpful in operations and capacity planning of the cluster.
I have one minor comment on the usage of the metric 'SizeInPercent' which they have to define individually for both tiered and non-tiered topics. Did you think about having a single mbean metric for both tiered or no tiered topics for 'SizeInPercent'? ~Satish. On Thu, 8 Jan 2026 at 11:42, Kamal Chandraprakash <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Manan, > > Thanks for the KIP! > > The new `sizeInPercent` and `localSizeInPercen`t metrics will be useful > over the absolute partition size metrics > for the admin to plan and provision the cluster. > > The admin can configure an alert on LocalSizeInPercent metric to ensure > that the data kept in the local disk > is up to the configured local-retention time. This will save remote read > costs. The proposal LGTM. > > Thanks, > Kamal > > On Tue, Dec 16, 2025 at 6:58 PM Manan Gupta <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > This email starts the discussion thread for KIP-1257: Partition Size > > Percentage Metrics for Storage Monitoring. This KIP introduces > > retention-aware, percentage-based partition metrics that significantly > > improve Kafka’s storage observability. The proposed metrics simplify > > alerting, enhance capacity planning, and provide clear visibility into > > retention pressure—especially for tiered storage—while remaining > > lightweight, backward compatible, and operationally intuitive. > > > > I'd appreciate your initial thoughts and feedback on the proposal. > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/MAEXG > > > > > > Thanks, > > Manan > >
